Botting

[Jaxad0127]

This has always been a public rule. If you use a program to bot, you get a permaban. If you just put weights on they keyboard (or whatever), you get another chance (assuming you haven't done it before).

[Katze]

It's been handled that way for about one and a half year now. But you are right: it's not written anywhere besides in the discussion of a wiki page which is not linked to anywhere.

Which you can also find on that page no link is referring to, is the proposal that it is and stays a permanent ban. Edit: correction: I didn't read that stuff properly before writing.

And I do think we need to discuss that internally. Thanks for noticing.

[Crush]

Researching, downloading and installing a bot software requires a lot more criminal energy than just using the tools you already got on hand. So I think that automated botting should be faced with even less tolerance.

[Crush]

Crush: That is like a Judge saying, "Well since you just stole that crappy Chevette instead of a Cadillac I will cut you a break" regardless it is still grand theft auto. The intent to purposely break the rules is still there.

It's more like "Because you took a car which was already standing there with the motor running, the driver door open and the owner nowhere to be found instead of breaking into the car and hot-wiring it I will cut you a break"

[Katze]

Katze: How many people do you actually think reads the wiki unless searching for something specific such as quest or magic help? Show me one post on the abuse board where someone was perm-banned for "automated botting" that isn't recent. Tell me there isn't atleast one thread on the private discussion boards in reference to automated botting so I can call you a liar.

well, I actually said there was no link to that wiki page. NOWHERE! not even on the wiki. so it's no wonder nobody can read it. And it's only suggestions what's written there.

The actual decisions have been made on irc in 2008. And that's a fact. And if you want to point out it should be written somewhere for everyone to read it, you can also do that in a more constructive way. Thank you.

Actually, we are (I am) currently trying to discuss internally what we think should be the punishment. But I doubt there will be any change. And whatever the outcome, it will be written down somewhere...at least it should be.

[Tiana]

Lord of the Flies - I am not sure what you consider "recent" but there is this Court House thread from Feb 2009.

http://forums.themanaworld.org/viewtopi ... =20&t=5901

There might be older ones but this one stuck in my head for some reason. The punishment for programmed afk botting AFAIK has always been stricter than "weight" afk botting or inattention (watching TV while holding down the target/attack keys).

[Big Crunch]

best thread ever.

I have not looked into this rule, however, if its not explicitly posted, then it should be. As should they all be, and in as much detail as possible. Leaving interpretation to resolve issues is a poor substitute for proper regulation.

[Katze]

Well, we currently don't need any strict regulations since the existing GMs know how to use common sense. And it has become clear in the past that only if a GM is a bad GM strict regulations are needed.

But it is true we need to have a warning about the punishment for botting somewhere. This is quite defined. But all other punishments can differ from case to case. And if anything unfair happens, I think everyone of us is willing to change their decision for the good of everyone.

[yourmistakes]

i always bot naked, so it's no issue

[iceslice]

I think automated client deserves more punishment since the user gets more benefit while afk fighting. But problem is you cant always prove if someone using that kinds of client.

If that's so then punishment needs be situational which requires the punisher to be above controversy. But rule based punishment is still preferred.

I dont know which one's to follow

[triggs]

Why is there no link on the wiki to that page?